alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed, October 22, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00813-CV

____________

GEORGE HOWARD GIBBS, Appellant

V.

SONYA HONG GIBBS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 280th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-43312

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due October 1, 2012. See Tex. R. App. P. 

35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The 

record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed 

timely, we issue the following order.

We order Hipolita Lopez, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Davis, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pesce, J.), both rendered June 20, 1989, convicting him of murder in the second degree under Indictment No. 8479/87 and robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 9508/87, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Annual Report of Lapis Technologies, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Harry
      Mund, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




March
                31, 2008
            
            /s/
                Harry MundHarry
                    Mund
                  Chief
                    Executive Officer
# C_2021278EN.01000402.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Banco de Portugal, Fundo de Resolução, Novo Banco SA, Sucursal en España v VR

(Case C-504/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Banking supervision - Reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions - Directive 2001/24/EC - Reorganisation measure adopted by an administrative authority in the home Member State of a credit institution - Transfer of rights, assets or liabilities to a ‘bridge institution’ - Transfer back to the credit institution subject to the reorganisation measure - Article 3(2) - Lex concursus - Effect of a reorganisation measure in other Member States - Mutual recognition - Article 32 - Effects of a reorganisation measure on a pending lawsuit - Exception to the application of the lex concursus - Article 47, first paragraph, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Effective judicial protection - Principle of legal certainty)

(2021/C 278/05)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Banco de Portugal, Fundo de Resolução, Novo Banco SA, Sucursal en España

Defendant: VR

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(2) and Article 32 of Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of credit institutions, read in the light of the principle of legal certainty and of the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding recognition, without further conditions, in legal proceedings on the merits pending in a Member State other than the home Member State relating to a liability which a credit institution had been relieved of by a first reorganisation measure taken in the latter Member State, the effects of a second reorganisation measure seeking to transfer back, with retroactive effect at a date prior to the opening of such proceedings, that liability to that credit institution, where such recognition has the result that the credit institution to which the liabilities had been transferred by the first measure can no longer be sued, with retroactive effect, the purposes of those proceedings, thereby calling into question judicial decisions already adopted in favour of the applicant who is the subject of those same proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.

---
# C_2019025EN.01004501.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/45

---

Action brought on 30 October 2018 — Aupicon and Others v EEAS

(Case T-655/18)

(2019/C 25/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Delphine Aupicon (Gaborone, Botswana) and ten other applicants (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul Decision ADMIN(2017)26 of the Director General of Budget and Administration of the European External Action Service of 19 December 2017 on the determination of the countries in which living conditions can be deemed equivalent to those of the European Union, which do not give rise to the right to an allowance for living conditions referred to in Article 10 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations — financial year 2018; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Decision ADMIN(2017)26 of the Director General of Budget and Administration of the European External Action Service of 19 December 2017 on the determination of the countries in which living conditions can be deemed equivalent to those of the European Union, which do not give rise to the right to an allowance for living conditions referred to in Article 10 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations — financial year 2018;

| — | so far as necessary, annul the applicants’ pay slip for January 2018; |
| --- | --- |

—

so far as necessary, annul the applicants’ pay slip for January 2018;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of the third paragraph of Article 1 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, on the ground that the EEAS did not adopt any general implementing provisions in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of the third paragraph of Article 1 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, on the ground that the EEAS did not adopt any general implementing provisions in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging (i) manifest errors of assessment committed by the EEAS in its analysis of the criteria which must be taken into account when calculating the allowance for living conditions and (ii) failure to state relevant reasons. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging (i) manifest errors of assessment committed by the EEAS in its analysis of the criteria which must be taken into account when calculating the allowance for living conditions and (ii) failure to state relevant reasons.

---
# C_2019044EN.01007001.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/70 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/70

---

Order of the General Court of 30 November 2018 — Front Polisario v Council

(Case T-275/18) (1)

((Action for annulment - Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part - Act concluding the agreement - Lack of applicability of the agreement to the territory of Western Sahara - Lack of standing to bring proceedings - Inadmissibility))

(2019/C 44/92)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Front populaire pour la libération de la Saguia el-Hamra et du Rio de oro (Front Polisario) (represented by: G. Devers, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado and R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Decision (EU) 2018/146 of 22 January 2018 on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part (OJ 2018 L 26, p. 4).

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic or the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic or the European Commission.

| 3. | The Front populaire pour la libération de la Saguia-el-Hamra et du Rio de Oro (Front Polisario) shall pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Front populaire pour la libération de la Saguia-el-Hamra et du Rio de Oro (Front Polisario) shall pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

| 4. | The Front Polisario, the Council, the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and the French Republic shall each bear their own costs relating to their applications for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Front Polisario, the Council, the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and the French Republic shall each bear their own costs relating to their applications for leave to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 268, 30.7.2018.

---
# C_2019112EN.01002701.xml

| 25.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/27

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Faro (Portugal) lodged on 28 December 2018 — Rolibérica, Lda v Autoridade para as Condições do Trabalho

(Case C-834/18)

(2019/C 112/32)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Faro

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rolibérica, Lda

Defendant: Autoridade para as Condições do Trabalho

Question referred

Can Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 be interpreted to the effect that it requires the weekly rest period for drivers engaged in the carriage of goods and passengers by road to begin and end between 00:00 on Monday and 24:00 on Sunday or, on the other hand, can it be taken in full and without interruption between each week worked?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 (OJ 2006 L 102, p. 1).

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 16

- 00719

- CV

IN RE Muriel GILFORD

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 23, 2016

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On November 1, 2016

, R elator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The court has

considered R elator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that R elator is not entitled

to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See T EX

. R. A PP

.

P . 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2015

- PA

- 02672, styled In the Interest of M.I.G., a Child , pending in the

1 66th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Karen H. Pozza presiding.
#### Emanuel D. KELMANS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 20245.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 15, 1963.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 12, 1963.

*373J. Edward Worton, Miami, Fla., for appellant.

Lloyd G. Bates, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., William A. Meadows, Jr., U. S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for appellee.

Before CAMERON, WISDOM, and ■GEWIN, Circuit Judges. $

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was convicted on a one-count indictment charging him with “knowingly and fraudulently making] a false oath” in a bankruptcy proceeding in that he swore to the bankrupt having no assets “whereas in truth and fact the said bankrupt had substantial assets”. The Court has read the record and has carefully considered the briefs filed and the oral argument. We find that there is no merit to the appellant’s contentions. Contrary to the appellant’s contentions, we hold as follows:

(1) The indictment was sufficient; the grand jury asserted knowledge of .substantial assets in the possession of the bankrupt. United States v. DeBrow, 1953, 346 U.S. 374, 74 S.Ct. 113, 98 L.Ed. 92; Kelly v. United States, 5 Cir., 1931, 47 F.2d 122.

(2) The evidence was sufficient to show that the defendant signed the bankruptcy schedules under oath, an essential element •of the offense.

(3) The trial judge did not err in his rulings on the admissibility of the evi•dence introduced by the Government.

The judgment must be affirmed.
# C_2021182EN.01000501.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 9 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — VG Bild-Kunst v Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz

(Case C-392/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Copyright and related rights in the information society - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 3(1) - Concept of ‘communication to the public’ - Embedding, in a third party’s website, of a copyright-protected work by means of the process of framing - Work freely accessible with the authorisation of the copyright holder on the licensee’s website - Clause in the exploitation agreement requiring the licensee to introduce effective technological measures against framing - Lawfulness - Fundamental rights - Article 11 and Article 17(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)

(2021/C 182/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: VG Bild-Kunst

Respondent: Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the embedding, by means of the technique of framing, in a third party website page, of works that are protected by copyright and that are freely accessible to the public with the authorisation of the copyright holder on another website, where that embedding circumvents measures adopted or imposed by that copyright holder to provide protection from framing, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.

---
EXHIBIT 21

              Subsidiaries of American HealthChoice, Inc.


                     Subsidiary                            Clinic
  1.  AHC Chiropractic Clinics, Inc., a Texas     Bandera, Wurzbach, San
        corporation                                 Pedro, Corpus Christi,
                                                    San Benito, Laredo & Katy
                                                    Chiropractic
      AHC Physicians Corporation, Inc., a         San Pedro & Southcross
        Texas corporation                           medical
      AHC Physicians Corporation, Inc., a         Inactive
        Georgia corporation
      Total Medical Diagnostics, Inc., a          Inactive
        Delaware corporation
      Nationwide Sports and Injury, Inc., a       Bandera Physical therapy
        Texas corporation
      United Chiropractic Clinics of Uptown,      Uptown
        Inc., a Louisiana corporation
      New Orleans East Chiropractic Clinics,      New Orleans East
        Inc., a Louisiana corporation
      AHC Clinic Management, L.L.C., a Texas      Inactive
        limited liability company
      AHI Management, Inc., a Texas               Corporate office
        corporation
      Diagnostic Services, Inc., a Texas          Inactive
        corporation
      Katy Sports Injury and Rehab,               Inactive
        Incorporated, a Texas corporation
      Pacific Chiropractic (San Pedro),
        Incorporated, d/b/a United Chiropractic   Inactive
        Clinic, a Texas corporation
      Apple Chiropractic Clinic of Wurzbach,
        Incorporated, a Texas corporation         Inactive
      Valley Family Health Center, L.L.C., a
        Texas limited liability company           Valley Family chiropractic
#### Associates Financial Services Co. of Hawai'i, Inc. v. Mijo

17027

11/25/97

Vacated and Remanded
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5208]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

 HOUSE REPUBLICANS HAVE ACTED, PRESIDENT REMAINS AWOL ON SEQUESTRATION

  (Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to 
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, defense sequestration is a 
very real danger that will threaten our national security, put our 
brave men and women in uniform at risk, and destroy up to 1 million 
jobs across our country. Sadly, the President avoids action on this 
extremely important issue.
  House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon has recently been 
quoted in Politico saying:

       We're overdue for guidance from the administration on how 
     they interpret the law and plan to implement sequestration 
     mechanically.

  Last May, House Republicans voted to prevent sequestration by passing 
legislation which replaces these drastic defense cuts while maintaining 
a strong national defense. Additionally, one week ago today, the House 
passed the Sequestration Transparency Act with an overwhelming 
bipartisan vote of 414-2, which holds the administration accountable 
for these cuts. I urge the President and Senate to act before it's too 
late and hundreds of thousands of hardworking Americans lose their 
jobs.
  In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget 
September the 11th in the global war on terrorism.

                          ____________________
```
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 10.4

                        ASSIGNMENT OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST

BY THIS ASSIGNMENT OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST ("Assignment") made and entered into
as of the 29th day of December 2000, AMORTIBANC MANAGEMENT L.C., a Texas Limited
Liability Company.,("Assignor"), and 1st Realty Investments, Inc., a Nevada For
Profit Corporation, ("Assignee"), agree as follows:

      1. Assignment. For the amount of $74,579.00 evidenced by a note for that
amount from Assignee in favor of Assignor, together with other necessary and
agreed upon consideration as set forth below, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, Assignor hereby irrevocably sells, transfers and
assigns to Assignee all of its membership interest and participation percentage
in Firebird Financial L.L.C. Assignee hereby accepts the assignment and transfer
of the Assignors' membership interest in Firebird Financial L.L.C., and agrees
to assume any and all obligations and responsibilities associated with such
interest from and after the date of this Assignment and hold Assignors harmless
from any and all liabilities relating thereto.

      2. Further Acts: Additional Documents. Assignors and Assignee shall
perform all such further acts and execute and deliver any and all additional
documents and instruments that may be necessary or desirable to consummate,
evidence or confirm the assignment of the interest described herein.

      3. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Assignment has been executed as of the day and
year first above written.

                                            "ASSIGNORS"

                                            AMORTIBANC MANAGEMENT, L.C.
                                            a Texas limited liability company

                                            /s/    Edward W. Dietrich
                                                   -----------------------------
                                            Name   Edward W. Dietrich
                                                   -----------------------------
                                            Title  Vice President
                                                   -----------------------------

                                            "ASSIGNEE"

                                            1st Realty Investments, Inc.
                                            a Nevada For Profit Corporation

                                            /s/    William Szilagyi
                                                   -----------------------------
                                            Name   William Szilagyi
                                                   -----------------------------
                                            Title  President
                                                   -----------------------------
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24 - 00 37 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ANDREW DAVID LARSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 30 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 24 2024

09/24/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0037